(Post)rationalism has a serious problem in lacking systematic, articulated goals. That's not surprising since it's founded on methods, not conclusions. There are some good and important conclusions reached from using those methods, but they're in the attic and not many people successfully find their way there from the front door.

Most people come in already clutching latent ethnonationalism or thinking the NAP is all they need to build a worldview. They like it here because they find a shiny tool that helps them think they were right all along. Many in the mainstream left that have heard of rationalism think it's an elaborate facade to justify what are really failure modes. On a purely observational basis, it's hard to say they're wrong. The people embodying failure modes are numerous and visible, while loudly trying to justify themselves.

The people doing it right are by definition epistemologically timid about staking out a platform, but it hinders translating rationality into effective action that involves more than a dozen people. It would help being able to say to people who could not derive it for themselves what we value and why its worthy of support. That should start by communicating that rationalism as a value system is not just supra-individual and supra-ethnic, but even supra-specific.

Interested in any further subjective/objective info people may have on bacopa (apart from high-ranking NCBI and Google Scholar results, which I've skimmed). Seems to have potential for ADHD, but I hadn't heard of lethargy/amotivation side effects Scott mentions here. That could be on-target when it comes to ADHD, but maybe not.

That doesn't say anything about ability to do a job, much less to do an engineering job.

I do see nearby that, "the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes". This is in pretty obvious territory, unless you don't accept biology means there are fewer women able to pass qualifications to be a firefighter.

Don't forget you originally staked out the claim that the memo calls women inferior. Can you accept that's not the case?

You seem to be falling back on an availability heuristic because it's easier for you to conceive of a bad faith argument than a good faith one. You may be drawing upon expectations that white men are, on average, more likely to hold racist and sexist beliefs. As the memo points out, averages should not be used to constrain expectations on individuals in such a way.

Know your purpose and audience. If the intent is just to make them aware of Rust, don't go on a needless diatribe. On the other hand, if you're advocating Rust's fitness for a particular purpose within your company, you have to contrast it with alternatives. I'm preparing a presentation myself, and I know "Why not Go?" is a question people are going to ask.

The things you're saying have basically no relation to what actually happened. The memo never implied anyone is inferior, and it never supported discrimination. There is intelligence and respect on both sides of the issue, but the meta-issue is people not willing to accept that. I've written more about it here: https://medium.com/@rhoark/a-pro-diversity-medium-post-56175c3ff496

FWIW, it's not as if he independently circulated this memo apropos of nothing. It was in an internal discussion forum that already existed for the express purpose of discussing Google's diversity hiring policies.

You're totally right about Mars. There's nothing on the surface that would be worth exporting. There are, however, more diverse natural resources to be gathered from asteroids, which have the additional advantage of skipping a lot of difficulty that surrounds landing on Mars. Because Mars has an atmosphere that is thin but non-existent, it's much harder to deal with than either Earth's atmosphere or a complete vacuum like you'd find on the moon.

Another major consideration is gravity. We know that microgravity isn't optimal for human health, but there hasn't been any serious effort to constrain a minimum healthy amount more precisely. The prospects aren't completely hopeless for a future on a massive solar system body, but the best places to look would be Callisto (a moon of Jupiter) and Titan (a moon of Saturn). These are the places, after the Earth, with the least radiation hazards. (At Callisto on account of Jupiter's magnetosphere, and at Titan because of its thick atmosphere.)